2014 Penn State Nittany Lions Football Schedule

Final Record: 7-6, 2-6 (Big Ten)
Date   Opponent Time/TV Tickets
Aug. 30
Knights UCF Knights
Croke Park, Dublin, Ireland
Won 26-24
Sep. 6
Zips Akron Zips
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Won 21-3
Sep. 13
Scarlet Knights at Rutgers Scarlet Knights
High Point Solutions Stadium, Piscataway, NJ
Won 13-10
Sep. 20
Minutemen UMass Minutemen
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Won 48-7
Sep. 27
Wildcats Northwestern Wildcats (HC)
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Lost 29-6
Oct. 4
Open Date
Oct. 11
Wolverines at Michigan Wolverines
Michigan Stadium, Ann Arbor, MI
Lost 18-13
Oct. 18
Open Date
Oct. 25
Buckeyes Ohio State Buckeyes
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Lost 31-24 (OT)
Nov. 1
Terrapins Maryland Terrapins
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Lost 20-19
Nov. 8
Hoosiers at Indiana Hoosiers
Memorial Stadium, Bloomington, IN
Won 13-7
Nov. 15
Owls Temple Owls
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Won 30-13
Nov. 22
Fighting Illini at Illinois Fighting Illini
Memorial Stadium, Champaign, IL
Lost 16-14
Nov. 29
Spartans Michigan State Spartans
Beaver Stadium, University Park, PA
Lost 34-10
2014 New Era Pinstripe Bowl
Dec. 27
Eagles Boston College Eagles
Yankee Stadium, Bronx, NY
Won 31-30 (OT)

Penn State Headlines

    1. Caleb Wilkes
      December 5, 2016 at 11:52 am

      Penn State certainly has some good arguments for inclusion, but I think you are not giving the opposing point of view sufficient credit.

      The guidelines state that “When circumstances at the margins indicate that teams are comparable, then the following criteria must be considered:”

      The committee decided that Penn State and Ohio State were not comparable, but rather that Ohio State was at the core better than Penn State. So they did not even have to resort to the 4 criteria factors.

      • Garrett
        December 5, 2016 at 4:23 pm

        It seems to me like PSU and OSU should be comparable, at least according to these factors.

      • Jeff
        December 5, 2016 at 6:58 pm

        One glaring thing left out of this article was the fact that OSU had 1 loss and PSU had 2. That is kind of a big deal. Would be less of a big deal if PSU had higher quality wins, better road wins, better SOS but they do not. The criteria above makes a lot of sense when you compare two teams with the same amount of losses. If we are going to make this thing simple (only conference champions are in), then we wouldn’t need a committee. That’s why we have it, so that they can break down the teams and not rely on simplistic rules for why one team makes it and one doesn’t.

        For those who want to put only conference champions in, are you putting VTech in if they beat Clemson or Florida in if they beat Alabama?

        For those who rely on head-to-head as the end all be all, then every team would be out, other than Alabama. For Penn St, Pitt and Michigan would be in over them (if you ignore win-loss record). If you don’t ignore win-loss record, Michigan would still be in over Penn St, but Ohio State would be in over Michigan.

        Bottom line is this thing isn’t simple, that is why there is a committee.

      • Brandon
        December 6, 2016 at 10:48 am

        *Caleb Wilkes – The problem with that “opposing point of view” is that it doesn’t hold water. The committee’s decision that Ohio St. is “unequivocally better” doesn’t apply here for the simple fact that they LOST to Penn St. ON THE FIELD. I don’t know what sort of alternate dimension I woke up in this week, but where I from we go by logic. And logic would dictate that you can’t deem 1 team better than another team when the 1st team lost to the second team on the field. That makes absolutely no sense, thus it doesn’t fly here.

      • Jeff
        December 6, 2016 at 1:22 pm

        Brandon – by your definition, Michigan should be ahead of Penn St and Penn St is not unequivocally better than Pitt.

        I would absolutely agree with you in your comparison of Penn St and Ohio St if they both had one loss. In that scenario, despite Ohio State having a better SOS, Penn St should be higher based on head to head and conference championship. But Penn St lost twice. The head-to-head affords them the opportunity to erase one mistake, not two.

    2. lost in Va.
      December 5, 2016 at 12:00 pm

      10 years ago, Urban Meyer said: “only teams that won their conferences should compete for the National Championship”…….yet the Buckeyes did not turn down their Fiesta Bowl/semi-final game invite…..hippocrites.

      • Brandon
        December 6, 2016 at 10:52 am

        I expect nothing less from Urban Meyer. This is the same guy who faked a medical condition just so he could jump ship from having to play Saban and Alabama every other year and ran to a talent loaded team in a weaker conference in Ohio St.

      • Steve
        December 6, 2016 at 4:13 pm

        lol you are stupid. 10 years ago we didn’t have a playoff, and a coach advocating for his team is nothing new.

    3. James
      December 5, 2016 at 1:46 pm

      Ohio st. had a better overall record and that why they should of been in the big ten champtionship game

      • Travis B
        December 5, 2016 at 3:09 pm

        Uhh what?


      • David
        December 5, 2016 at 9:40 pm

        The old XII method where teams with the same conference record were chosen to represent their division based on the higher BCS ranking, ahead of head-to-head. So, perhaps you’re suggesting that the B1G could choose the entrants to the CCG with the same conference record by overall record.

      • Brandon
        December 6, 2016 at 11:08 am

        *James – Sorry, but that’s not the way teams playing for conference champions are decided. Conference wins are what decides who participates in the conference championship, and Penn St. won their division by beating Ohio St. on the field. Period.

      • Brian
        January 16, 2017 at 2:22 pm

        All Penn St. fans or not. Not only did Ohio St. stink up the field. Let’s not forget Rose Bowl, Penn St. LOST giving up 49 points!! No matter who played Clemson = Loss.

    4. FanOFootball
      December 5, 2016 at 3:30 pm

      Should have been Penn State based on head to head and conference championship. Ohio State may or may not be the better team right now, but they didn’t win their conference. Conference title should be worth something.

      • Steve
        December 6, 2016 at 4:14 pm

        They ARE worth something. It is the only reason Penn State is even in the discussion. But it’s not everything, and certainly not enough to overcome a blowout, non-competitive loss to Michigan and a loss to a mediocre 4 loss team.

    5. HCH
      December 5, 2016 at 6:22 pm

      This entire argument is pointless. To me, Penn St beat OSU in the head-to-head & won the Big Ten. TV ratings dictated having the Buckeyes in the playoffs. This could all be solved easily & to the delight of fans & big media if we expand to an 8-to-10 team playoff. I’m a Clemson fan.

      • Jeff
        December 5, 2016 at 11:21 pm

        I get how as a Clemson fan you would rather face Washington or Penn St.

      • Caleb
        December 7, 2016 at 12:04 pm

        Exactly. Just ask college basketball about how easy it is to narrow down the playoff field. They take 68 teams and there’s never anyone upset about being left out. (sarcasm)

        Expanding the field does nothing. If we had eight teams this year, then we’d be having the same conversation only about more teams. Teams 8-13 in the final CFP rankings each have three losses. Instead of having a discussion between two or three teams (even though only four Power Five teams ended with one loss or fewer, and all of them made the playoff), we’re now discussing eight. And everyone would be up in arms about the Big Ten getting four teams in. And do you really think teams with three losses deserve a shot at playing for the championship? You’re all already upset about a one-loss non-conference champion playing in the playoff; you think you’ll be happy with a three-loss non-conference champion?

    6. Keowee
      December 5, 2016 at 6:37 pm

      the Committee should NOT revise their criteria.

      Every year will have different teams and different nuances. This is where the BCS made mistakes. Nebraska 2001 does not win XII but gets into Championship. So let’s add Bonus Points for Conf Champs. New rules all the time.

      As we have learned from Basketball, the Each year there is a different Committee. One group puts greater emphasis on Non-Conf Schedule, the next emphasizes Record Over Last 10 Games, the next targets Top 50 Wins. Football Committee will eventually work that way too.

      With this Committee: Ohio St wins over Okla, Wisc, Neb, Mich, carry greater weight than Penn St wins over Ohio St, Wisc, Iowa, Temple. Penn St losses to Mich & Pitt carry greater weight than Ohio St loss to Penn St.

      People did not want Computers in charge, so now we have a Committee. But each Committee will have different members. There will not be consistency. The one thing that matters most: the more games you win & the fewer you lose, the better your chances.

    7. Evan
      December 5, 2016 at 6:39 pm

      A 4 team playoff is different than an 8 team playoff.
      I can see OSU getting picked over PSU in an 8 team playoff (they would have both made it though); however, this is not an 8 team playoff. Criteria must be different.

    8. Rick Kleban
      December 5, 2016 at 8:39 pm

      The author tried to trick us into believing her argument was sound by assuming her conclusion. She assumed Penn State was comparable, without ever stating that. She is just hoping we are asleep enough that we don’t notice that she made that assumption so she can bait us into believing her argument is valid. But as other readers pointed out, the committee explicitly said they did not view the teams as equal in terms of their body of work. In the future, please know that if we are reading your article, we are not asleep.

      • Rick Kleban
        December 5, 2016 at 8:48 pm

        Oh, and you need to pick up the mic.

      • Kevin Kelley
        December 6, 2016 at 2:13 pm

        The author didn’t try to trick anybody. It’s based on the criteria posted on the CFB playoff’s own website.

      • WW
        December 6, 2016 at 7:37 pm

        I agree with Rick. The author assumed the teams were comparable to trigger the four criteria she discussed. But the committee repeatedly state they did not view them as comparable. End of story (or drop the mic).

        Notably, to prove her point, the author doesn’t even discuss each team’s out of conference schedule and results. This ignores 1/4 of the whole season.’. The author fails to discuss Penn State lost to Pitt and Ohio State beat Big 12 champion Oklahoma the road. The author fails to consider that two-loss teams almost never get in over one-loss teams. The author fails to consider that Penn State did not beat a single team on the road who had a winning record. In stark contrast, Ohio State beat two 10-win teams on the road and one, Wisconsin, had a bye week to prepare for Ohio State.

        This post is not meant to detract from the Penn State’s successful season. To start 2-2 and then finish with nine straight wins is no mean feat. I, for one, hope they stretch it to 10 with a win in the Rose Bowl.

      • Caleb
        December 7, 2016 at 12:16 pm

        Rick and WW taking care of the dirty work for me.

        People are upset that the TWO LOSS Penn State team didn’t get the benefit of their three point head-to-head win over the ONE LOSS Ohio State team. Shouldn’t you be upset that Michigan doesn’t get the benefit of their 39 point head-to-head victory over PSU? Especially considering both teams had two losses. Why is no one upset about that? Michigan also boasts three wins over teams ending the year in the top 10 (PSU, Wisconsin, and Colorado) compared to PSU’s two (Wisconsin and Ohio State).

      • Ronnie
        December 7, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        Ohio State is in the CFP (ranked ahead of Penn State) because of the eye-test. The CFP Selection Committee gave itself this loophole by including in their protocol “flexibility and discretion to select a non-champion or independent under circumstances where that particular non-champion or independent is unequivocally one of the four best teams in the country.”

        But this goes against the committees own “beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved; and that championships won on the field and strength of schedule are important values that must be incorporated into the selection process.” This belief that the regular season is unique is the “Ethos” of college football.

        The eye-test or better talent—perceived—shouldn’t be used as a selection criterion. Ohio State was ranked higher than Penn State in the final CFP rankings through a back-door.

        It is the regular season that matters (“based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved”). Even the talking heads at ESPN sell/promote their broadcasts by stating that “every game matters” and “who’s in”.

        This loophole needs to be eliminated as it contradicts the CFP Selection Committee’s Protocol. They repudiate the Polls for doing the same thing they have just done. “Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values [College Football’s Ethos]; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.” This contradiction is the fundamental part of Amy Daughters article and why it’s titled “Should the CFB Playoff Committee revise their selection criteria?”

        Penn State and Ohio State aren’t “at the margins” or “comparable”. Penn State won the Big Ten. Ohio State did not. Teams “at the margins” and “comparable” are Washington compared to Penn State or Clemson compared to Western Michigan.

        My question, why on earth play a conference schedule, have a Conference Championship game, and end up with a Conference Champion?!? “Based on beliefs that the regular season is unique and must be preserved” this part of the regular season is equivalent to the first round, second round, “Sweet 16” or quarterfinals in a playoff system.

        Every Game Matters.

        The CFP Committee doesn’t release rankings until November, which allows them to incorporate conference games into their equation. The committee values conference play. They even say being Conference Champion matters.

        Someone in a comment asked that if Florida had defeated Alabama would you leave Alabama out. You bet I would! Alabama was the best in the SEC West, Florida the best in the SEC East. How would you decide which is better other than playing the title game (the only way might be record vs. common opponents)? If you’re worried about your Conference Champion not being “deserving” because they’re not the perceived “better team” you shouldn’t have two divisions and be playing a championship game.

        Don’t Lose.

        Should we be determining Champions on the field or though polling?

        Ohio State shouldn’t be in the CFP final four because Penn State eliminated them! I don’t care if you win by luck or a fluke.

        How to whittle down the ten conference champions (or the FBS Independents) is really the question. Who gets into the four team playoff among Temple, Clemson, Penn State, Oklahoma, Western Kentucky, Western Michigan, San Diego State, Washington, Alabama, and Arkansas State OR Appalachian State? Every other FBS team lost their regular season “playoff game” and was eliminated.

        The only way is head-to-head and, unfortunately, Strength of Schedule (a system driven by a mathematical equation, which the CFP protocol rails against). SOS assumes Team A would achieve a better record than Team B playing Team B’s schedule.

        But after you eliminate everyone but Conference Champions is a touch easier.

    9. David
      December 5, 2016 at 9:37 pm

      To paraphrase Captain Picard…
      You don’t lose to Pitt, and lose badly to Michigan, and expect to pass a team whose only loss is a fluke loss to you. Plus, Penn State didn’t face Nebraska, nor Wisconsin (until now). Penn State isn’t even close.

    10. Steve
      December 5, 2016 at 9:55 pm

      Penn St. deserved to go. The committee chose who they wanted. They did not consider that OSU barely beat a bad MSU team by one point the week before the Michigan game. Michigan pretty much gave the game away to OSU. Fumbles, interceptions etc. Everyone said Michigan was the better team. So how did the committee have OSU as a solid top 3 team? Answer: bias. They have not forgotten the PSU scandal. PSU can take heart when Clemson embarrasses OSU on New Years Eve.

      • Jeff
        December 5, 2016 at 11:15 pm

        You do realize that your entire argument can be turned against Penn St? First, penn st barely beat Minnesota and Indiana (final score was misleading). Second, that Michigan team OSU barely beat, beat PSU by 39. Third, you argue OSU got lucky bc Michigan gave the game away. Isn’t that exactly what OSU did at Penn St with 2 special teams gifts? If you want to be compared to OSU, schedule tougher and beat pitt. And one more thing; what is your argument going to be next year for the final 4 when your only loss is at OSU and OSU wins the conference championship? You going to only want conference champions then?

    11. JackStriker
      December 5, 2016 at 11:19 pm

      “For those who want to put only conference champions in, are you putting VTech in if they beat Clemson or Florida in if they beat Alabama?”

      JEFF is absolutely correct on this. I think it does suck that it CAN come down to a human decision as opposed to on the field results…….If Penn State beats Pitt, end of discussion.

      That being said, Washington has no chance against ‘Bama. I would have rather seen Michigan vs. ‘Bama and OSU vs. Clemson in playoff.

      • Leon
        January 1, 2017 at 10:59 am

        If you only have conference champions in the playoffs the conferences will change the way their champion is determined. So you may not end up with Florida/Alabama in the SEC, Va Tech/Clemson in the ACC or Pens State/Wisconsin in the Big 10. Sports championships should be decided by players on the field not by committees.

    12. Dave Bates
      December 6, 2016 at 7:08 am

      Good article Amy! While the playoffs are an improvement to develop and deliver a clear champion I think the real solution may include an expansion to 8 teams. One additional game would certainly help clean up some of the mess. Please don’t tell me about finals and pressures of college because finals are over this week and there is still 4-5 weeks in between for this to occur and let’s face it while there are some tremendous student athletes the majority of these players subscribed to the Cardale Jones philosophy “we are here to play football”!

    13. montrosebuff
      December 6, 2016 at 1:37 pm

      If the article’s stated criteria for selection were in force this year with all elements being weighted equally, Colorado would have passed USC for the Rose Bowl. Too many politics still at play.

      • WW
        December 6, 2016 at 7:42 pm

        Huh? I don’t follow. The article makes a big point about the head-to-head result being an ultimate tiebreaker. Last time I checked USC beat Colorado.

      • Ronnie
        December 7, 2016 at 3:23 pm

        As a hard-core fan of USC Football I’m happy they are in Rose Bowl. Though, quite frankly, without winning the Pac-12 it really doesn’t matter.

        But, I think Colorado should be in the Rose Bowl. Colorado went 8-2 (including their loss to Washington) in the Pac-12 and finished in front of USC, who went 7-2. There is no need for a tie-breaker WW.

        It comes down to wins and losses. Colorado had more of the important one.

      • Day
        December 7, 2016 at 6:20 pm


        No, its a popular contest & USC wins by a mile. Congrats to Colorado & their season but USC beat them on the field & people will rather watch USC vs Penn St in the ROSE BOWL. USC is USC, bottom line! Florida lost to Bama but Auburn is going to the Sugar bowl, that’s how it works. Enjoy your Rose Bowl & if the Trojans wins big then all this nonsense of how Penn St should be in the CFP will be set a side.

      • Ronnie
        December 7, 2016 at 7:54 pm

        I know SC is in the Rose Bowl because it’s a popularity contest. It isn’t just head-to-head. USC defeated Colorado in October. Long before everyone said SC was hot, that they had an outside chance at the CFP, and everyone (but Alabama) would fear them in an eight team playoff. USC didn’t make the CFP rankings until the second week of the rankings one month after they defeated Colorado. Colorado made the initial ranking (at #15) and were #12 when USC debuted.

        Bottom line, the CFP thought up to the final ranking Colorado was better even knowing USC had defeated them.

        I also think Colorado should have been ranked higher than Washington heading into the Pac-12 final. Remember, the rankings are supposed to be a snapshot of how the season had gone up that point.

        Auburn (3-1 vs common opponents) is in the Sugar Bowl because they are better then Florida (2-2 vs. common opponents, prior to SEC title game). That is why Auburn was ranked higher than Florida prior to the SEC Championship game and the shellacking Florida received confirmed that even more. The only way Florida would get to the Sugar Bowl was to defeat Alabama.

    14. Pat Logab
      December 6, 2016 at 6:00 pm

      We could go on and on… A person could argue Penn State is as hot as any team right now; along with their other positive factors. But beating OSU came about because Urban choked at the end; sent the kicking team out when they clearly didn’t have enough time to set up for the kick. Disaster followed. I doubt that will ever happen again.

    15. Michael
      December 6, 2016 at 10:28 pm

      By your argument, couldn’t you put PSU up against Michigan and have Michigan slightly ahead of PSU based on SOS and head to head? Maybe Michigan should be in and PSU still left out.

      • Michael
        December 6, 2016 at 10:31 pm

        And btw, PSU could be more “deserving”, clearly not due to resume, but due to head to head & championship, but the committee wants who they think are the best 4 teams on a neutral field. And obviously they think OSU beats PSU on a neutral field and has the better shot at beating Clemson or Alabama.

      • Ronnie
        December 7, 2016 at 3:29 pm

        You can’t put Michigan ahead of Penn State.

        Big Ten East standings: Penn State 8-1 (9-1 including B1G final), Ohio State 8-1, Michigan 7-2.

        In the CFP Ranking it should be Penn State in front of Ohio State who should be in front of Michigan.

        Why can’t people get this? Why do we keep a tally of wins and losses; thus have standings?

      • Jeff
        December 7, 2016 at 7:05 pm

        Ronnie – So your basically saying non-conference scheduling is completely meaningless. It sounds like in your eyes, Penn St could have lost to Kent, got blown out by Pitt and gotten beaten by Temple, but as long as they run the table in the B10, they are basically in.

        In my opinion, (full disclosure, I am an Ohio State fan, if that wasn’t obvious from previous posts), it would be very damaging to the game if you had this conference championship or bust mentality in the current 4-team playoff structure. First of all, you very rarely get the top 2 teams in each conference playing in the conference championship. Case in point, VT wasn’t 2nd best in ACC, Wisc wasn’t 2nd best in B10, Florida wasn’t 2nd best in SEC. If you say conference championships are the only criteria that matters, why is VT allowed to lose 2-3 games in conference but Louisville can’t afford to lose even 1? Another example being Wisconsin (2 losses in conf), who lost to B10 teams with 1 conf. loss and 2 conf. losses played in the B10 championship ahead of both teams. Yet somehow they are more deserving than both teams they lost to?
        Second, think about a playoff where we were seeing Penn St, Virginia Tech, Florida and Oklahoma. Would anyone watch outside the fanbases of those teams? The answer is probably not, likely because people would know that the teams representing the best 4 teams were not in-fact the best 4 teams. And remember, the goal of this thing is to get the 4 best teams.
        And the last point I will make (I could keep going), is that Ohio State and Penn St had the same conference record (both lost a game). Penn St rightfully won the conference tie-breaker for head to head but that has nothing to do with the national ranking. Also, it is important to realize that Penn St only won the conference tie-breaker because Michigan lost to Iowa by a point. If Michigan wins, there is a three-way tie where Ohio State wins the tiebreaker based on national ranking. If you go by the conference championship or bust mentality, you are basically saying Penn St is better than Ohio State because Michigan lost to Iowa. To me, that doesn’t make sense.

        All in all, if you want to go conference championship or bust, you will destroy the sport (lose your audience). The reason there is a committee in place is to figure out the complex comparisons like we had this year. In my opinion, they have gotten it right each year. They took Ohio St in 2014, who won the national championship. Despite OSU and MSU having the same record in 2015, they correctly took MSU by virtue of head-to-head and conference championship of two comparable teams. And now in 2016, they took OSU and Washington over PSU. Conference championships have mattered; 11 of the 12 playoff teams have been one. But situations will come up where a non-conference champion is better and more deserving than a conference champion and that is exactly what the committee is in place to figure out.

      • Day
        December 7, 2016 at 7:17 pm

        “Second, think about a playoff where we were seeing Penn St, Virginia Tech, Florida and Oklahoma. Would anyone watch outside the fanbases of those teams?”
        Not only would I not watch but I would go ahead & just hand the NC to Oklahoma.
        Just kidding but the Sooners would properly win.

      • Ronnie
        December 7, 2016 at 8:28 pm

        When you’re ranking teams from within a Conference, yes the conference schedule is the most important thing. You have a 8 or 9 game sampling to compare teams with, Instead the all hallowed head-to-head, or SOS. You also 4-7 (9 in the case of the Big12) common opponents to compare team with. Penn State (6-1) and Ohio State (6-1) had seven common opponents (including the Big Ten final). Penn State (7-1) and Michigan (6-2) had eight. Ohio State (6-1) and Michigan had seven (6-1).

        How do you know that Ohio State wouldn’t get the same results against Penn State’s non-conference schedule and vice-versa? You don’t, other than your opinion. SOS is fine when comparing teams for different conferences (say Ohio State and Washington), but for in-conference rankings, and using ACTUAL results, looking at a teams overall conference record, common opponent record, and head-to-head is best. These are more certain tie-breakers than SOS. Geez, all the conferences utilize W-L records in their standings, including for breaking ties.

        I didn’t say the conference championship games were the important component. In fact I think they are stupid, along with divisions because you get the situations you’re describing. But all the teams involved know the rules. But, Clemson knew that if they lost in the ACC final they probably wouldn’t have made the playoff. Should we not have conference championship games in the first place?

        I would say 96% of the college football world wants an expanded playoff (8 teams, 16. Maybe 24?) which would include non-conference champions. What would America say if Wisconsin, Oklahoma, USC, and Temple made the final four?

        Sorry the goal of the CFP is to find the National Champion. If you can’t you’re the best in your Conference how are the best in the nation? Again, why have conference champions then? There should just be 12 non-conference games and lets have the committee select the best four.

        Michigan wasn’t in the mix because they lost to Iowa you are correct. Why even use that as an example? Should that game not have been played? Should we just say Michigan is better than Penn State despite it? Are you crazy? I guess Michigan should have won that game. Remember Penn State defeated Iowa by 27. it’s called playing out the conference schedule. I could go on and on.

        The conference championships, though I dislike them, are the equivalent to Sweet-16 or Quarterfinal game.

        You won’t destroy the sport. It hasn’t destroyed NCAA basketball. Not only do you teams making the Elite 8, the Final Four, and winning the National Title that didn’t win their conference title, some haven’t even won their regular season conference title. I think basketball is doing just fine.

      • Jeff
        December 7, 2016 at 10:56 pm


        If the current structure was an 8-team playoff then I agree, put the power 5 conference winners, the top non power 5 team and 2 at large in the playoff. In that structure, you at least guarantee the top 4 teams are actually in the playoff. If your sole criteria is conference championship in the current structure, then you can’t guarantee you are getting the top 4 teams. You made the argument that under the conference championship model, every game matters. While that would be true For Ohio state, it essentially gives penn st a free pass in 2 games. Think about if Alabama slipped up vs Florida. You are really going to tell a team that thoroughly dominated their competition for 12 games that because of one slip up, they r not worthy despite every other team having at least 1 slip up as well? Heck, if Alabama lost to Florida i would still keep them at #1 and I’m from B10 country.

        Your concept that the conference championship games are like a play-in game would make some sense if u guarantee the top 2 teams from the conference actually played in these games. But they oftentimes don’t. At the end of the day, I just don’t understand people’s obsession with being simple (conference championship or bust) vs actually getting your hands dirty and analyzing who are truly the top 4 teams.

      • Ronnie
        December 8, 2016 at 2:45 pm


        How many times in the past has a conference title game winner not been deserving? Meaning there was such a disparity in overall conference record and national ranking that the result was truly an upset. How many of those “undeserving” Champions would’ve made a CFP final four?

        The only thing that happens because of this is a team being eliminated from a national playoff because they couldn’t win an important game (all games in the regular season are important according to college football’s society).

        In conferences that don’t have title games it’s much more rare (you could include divisions for that matter) that an “inferior” team wins the title.

        Based on what happened in the BCS era, your “doomsday” scenario of an illegitimate CFP final four truly doesn’t hold water. Only in 2001 and 2011 do we get any semblance of what you fear.

        14 out the 16 BCS final rankings would’ve given us a final four where the participants finished 6th or higher in the final rankings and I don’t even feel 2001 or 2011 would be less than worthy.

        Are you going to tell me teams ranked 5th or 6th are that inferior to anyone in the top four of a ranking?

        #5 Baylor or #6 TCU had a legit claim in 2014. #6 Stanford had a legit case in 2015. And, #5 Penn State certainly has a beef with the CFP this season.

        The only true fiasco would also have occurred in 2011. Alabama (who would not have made the final four) won the National Title without winning the their division or conference.

        Here would be each season’s final four (1998-2013) based on the final BCS Rankings and using only conference champions. I’ve included why someone that finished in the top four wouldn’t make the cut (*Indicates National Champion/Claimed National Champion):

        2013: 1-Florida State*, 2-Auburn, 4-Michigan State, 5-Stanford.
        3-Alabama tied Auburn in the SEC West, but Auburn won the division on a tie-breaker. Would the college football nation have been in an uproar because Stanford got in?

        2012: 1-Notre Dame, 2-Alabama*, 5-Kansas State, 6-Stanford.
        3-Florida tied 7-Georgia in the SEC East. Georgia lost to Alabama in the SEC title game.
        4-Oregon finished behind Stanford in the Pac-12 North. My belief is that 70% of your schedule, which is the conference season, should mean something. Oregon should have defeated Stanford.
        Notre Dame currently has a contract with the Power-5 to make the CFP (and had “way back” in the day to make the BCS title game).

        2011: 1-LSU, 3-Oklahoma State, 5-Oregon, 10-Wisconsin.
        2-Alabama, who won the BCS title, should never have been in it. They lost the SEC West to LSU. Why should LSU have to play them again? The CFP protocol says the regular season should be protected. ESPN hypes their broadcasts using this thinking!
        4-Stanford finished behind Oregon in the Pac-12 North.
        NOTE, 18-TCU won the MWC, with 7-Boise State finishing ranked higher than Wisconsin. The CFP repudiates this type of thinking found in past polls: “Under the current construct, polls (although well-intended) have not expressed these values; particularly at the margins where teams that have won head-to-head competition and championships are sometimes ranked behind non-champions and teams that have lost in head-to-head competition. Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who “deserve” to be selected.” Strength of Schedule is a “nuanced” mathematical formula. Maybe TCU should have been ranked 7th instead of Boise State.

        2010: 1-Auburn*, 2-Oregon, 3-TCU, 5-Wiscosin.
        4-Stanford lost to Oregon in the Pac-10 regular season. Every Game Matters!

        2009: 1-Alabama*, 2-Texas, 3-Cincinnati, 4-TCU.

        2008: 1-Oklahoma, 2-Florida*, 5-USC, 6-Utah.
        3-Texas finished behind Oklahoma in the Big-12 South
        4-Alabama lost to Florida in the SEC title game.

        2007: 1-Ohio State, 2-LSU*, 3-Virginia Tech, 4-Oklahoma.

        2006: 1-Ohio State, 2-Florida*, 5-USC, 6-Louisville
        3-Michigan finished behind Ohio State in the Big Ten.
        4-LSU finished behind Arkansas (who lost to Florida) the SEC West.

        2005: 1-USC, 2-Texas*, 3-Penn State, 6-Notre Dame
        4-Ohio State tied Penn State for the Big Ten, but lost whatever tie-breaker that was in place.

        2004: 1-USC*, 2-Oklahoma, 3-Auburn, 6-Utah.
        4-Texas finished behind Oklahoma in the Big 12 South.

        2003: 1-Oklahoma, 2-LSU*, 3-USC*, 4-Michigan

        2002: 1-Miami (FL), 2-Ohio State*, 3- Georgia, 6-Washington State.
        4-USC finished behind Washington State, but for some reason (it was SOS) they were ranked ahead of the Cougars (who played in the Rose Bowl as Champions of the Pac-10).

        2001: 1-Miami (FL)*, 3-Colorado, 4-Oregon, 8-Illinois
        2-Nebraska finished behind Colorado in the Big-12 North.

        2000: 1-Oklahoma*, 2-Florida State, 3-Miami (FL), 4-Washington

        1999: 1-Florida State*, 2-Virginia Tech, 3-Nebraska, 4-Alabama

        1998: 1-Tennessee*, 2-Florida State, 5-UCLA, 6-Texas A&M.
        3-Kansas State lost to Texas A&M in the Big-12 title game.
        4-Ohio State tied with 9-Wisconsin and Michigan (not ranked) for the Big Ten title. Wisconsin was declared Big Ten champion and played in the Rose Bowl.

      • Jeff
        December 8, 2016 at 3:54 pm

        I guess we will agree to disagree. You clearly want the best 4 conference champions and I want the best 4 teams. As you pointed out, most years we end up getting to the same place but this year was an anomaly where the best 4 teams were not all conference champions.

      • Day
        December 8, 2016 at 4:40 pm

        The four best teams got in, bottom line! If there is so much commotion about this CFP & the BCS, do we not forget what was going on before the BCS, bowls had contracts with conferences so even if you were undefeated you still had to go to that bowl. SEC had to go to the Sugar Bowl, Pac-12 & BIG had to go to the Rose Bowl, like the 1997 season when Michigan & Nebraska had to split a NC due to contracts in bowls. It also happened many other times in the past as well, the system is a lot better then what it once was & I really never had a problem with the BCS. Matter of fact if the BCS was still around the same exact same teams would be in.
        As for Bama & the 2011 season, I do agree with that Bama may should not have been there & I felt bad that LSU had to replay them but who else should’ve gotten in? Remember that Bama lost early in the season & it was not Bama’s fault that Oregon, Oklahoma & Oklahoma St lost at the end of the season in which Bama sneaked back in to the race & as they were smashing teams left & right, they proved they should’ve been there. This would’ve, could’ve, should’ve mentality of what should’ve happened & how it played out is meaningless. One thing I do like about the committee is there is an emotion that goes behind the selecting of teams, I would rather have Buckeyes in then Penn St, I would rather have Washington in then Penn St. The Nittany lions can prove how worthy they are next year, for now they should just enjoy the Rose Bowl, nothing wrong with that.

    16. Rod
      December 7, 2016 at 12:10 am

      They weren’t comparable to trigger the 4 criteria. Period. Every single team in the playoff has 1 loss or less. Penn St. lost to a 4 loss Pittsburgh team and lost by 39 to Michigan. Ohio State lost to Penn St., on the road. Penn St. is a very good team right now, but they shit the bed in 2 games. The out of conference games still matter.

    17. Corbishley Douglas
      December 31, 2016 at 8:50 pm

      It’s all a joke. Money talks. PSU should be in on criteria, period. Washington and OSU over PSU, no way. But “show me the money” is the mantra now, so get used to it. Next year for sure the selection committee will come under fire, as they will have to explain their choices against this year, and can’t use the strength of schedule argument (see Washington) nor conference championship (see Ohio State) to justify. But they are not the only losers, we all are. College football that for so long has been the best sport out there, now is hardly eorth watching. It’s all fixed such test in a pinch ….. show me the money.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    1. Day
      August 9, 2016 at 11:40 am

      This is a cute article, I would’ve kept out A&M vs UTSA since this is their 1st ever meeting.

    2. Hail Southern!
      August 9, 2016 at 6:19 pm

      If you watched the 2014 Georgia Southern @ Georgia Tech game or better yet, if you attended the game, then you would know the ACC referees took the game out of the players hands with a terrible reversal of an ON THE FIELD call (requires indisputable evidence…it’s still being disputed). Georgia Southern was the better team that day and still has the more dynamic roster. Thank you Paul Johnson and the Tech AD for not being scared (UGAg) and rescheduling the Eagles…GS won’t leave it in question this go around. It would be great for the state if GS and Tech continued to schedule a game (maybe a H&H once Paulson Stadium is expanded to 30k) every other year. Athletically, as of late, the two schools are closer to peers than big brother-little brother.

      • Kevin Kelley
        August 9, 2016 at 8:24 pm

        Georgia has played Georgia Southern six times since 1992, Georgia Tech only once. I don’t think Georgia is scared of GS.

      • Hail Southern!
        August 10, 2016 at 5:09 pm

        Interesting that 5 of those 6 times were when Georgia Southern had 63 scholarships. The 6th game was a carry over from GS’s FCS days and Georgia elected to move the game from 2016 to 2015 probably because they didn’t want an additional year of FBS recruiting for GS. Georgia was gifted that win last year and every dawg fan knows it. For both parties, it is understood that Georgia no longer wants any part in scheduling GS and frankly that’s fine by me.

      • Atlanta_Mafia
        August 11, 2016 at 10:23 am

        Don’t worry Kevin Kelly, that’s just GS non-sense talk. They told GSU that they’d never beat GS – but in the just the second meeting (last year) GSU gave them their worst defeat in the history of Paulson High School County Stadium, The glory days of GS are behind them. The newsflash to GS is that they are the #4 team in the state of Georgia and they think that they are #1.

      • William Satterwhite
        August 11, 2016 at 4:33 pm

        Georgia Tech got up big in that game and then let up and allowed Georgia Southern back in, the Eagles were far from the better team that day.

      • H
        August 11, 2016 at 5:34 pm

        Georgia Southern’s coach was on his way out and focused on a million dollar salary…way to go. How’d that bowl game work out for the mighty Panthers? Let’s compare some numbers for a minute…17-53 (129th in FBS) vs. 375-200-10 (14th in FBS)…0 D1 National Championships vs. 6 D1 National Championships (most all-time)…0 D1 Conference Titles vs. 11 D1 Conference Titles. WHEW! I can certainly understand why a Panther fan (those exist?) would cling like hell to that win against Georgia Southern! Run along now, let us men get back to it.

      • Atlanta_Mafia
        August 12, 2016 at 7:11 pm

        GS has never beat UGA – GS has never beat GT – GS is 50/50 against GSU.
        So your excuse is that GS got pounded at home by GSU cause your coach was dreaming about a real job? Really? That’s all it took for the mighty Beagles to lose at home? A coach’s daydream? All that tripe that GS spews about GSU and you got pounded in just the second effing year by a five year old football team? Fact is that Richt got fired because he almost lost to GS so that should tell you about how little respect there is for the GS product. So maybe GS needs to realize that they may start to fall behind KSU or Mercer. You guys have such an incredible false sense of entitlement from all those Pee-Wee league trophies. Probably ought to go on back to FCS Pee-Wee league! How about that Capt GAyTAy?

      • Hail Southern!
        August 13, 2016 at 1:11 pm

        The Real GSU has played UGA and GT once with equal scholarships. Do you understand that having 22 less scholarships is a disadvantage? Once the playing field was made even, the Real GSU lost by a combined 10 points in their first outings with 85 scholarships. Again, I appreciate GT rescheduling the Real GSU unlike UGAg (I bet you’re a UGAg fan before a GAy St fan). Do you understand that when a head coach does not prep their team for a game that the team is unprepared? Big concepts here. Do you have any facts or just opinions? Richt was on the hot seat at the start of that season and the season before that…try to keep up. The fact that you recognize KSU and Mercer says a lot about where you view GAy St. Pee-Wee trophies…you’re talking about Division 1 National Championships. Do you understand that prior to the College Football Playoff, the FCS Playoff was the highest form of a college football playoff in existence? Oh but computers picking two teams worked out every time. The Real GSU should go back to FCS? You mean the Real GSU with the 18-7 FBS record (.720)? How about GAy St with the 7-30 FBS record (.189). This is too easy man, c’mon. (A) Why would GAy St field a football team and (B) why would ANYONE be a fan???? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!

      • stoopnagle
        August 26, 2016 at 4:03 pm

        Southern has never beaten Georgia and never will.

      • Atlanta_Mafia
        November 19, 2016 at 5:46 pm

        The “REAL” GSU just beat the GaSo clown big talkers AGAIN! GAyTAy!!!
        So GaSo now has a LOSING record against GSU along with
        never beating UGA and GT! So just go STFU !!!!!!!!!!

    3. Matt Rigby
      August 9, 2016 at 9:20 pm

      what about the Brigham Young-Utah State game or the Notre Dame-Navy game?

      • David
        August 9, 2016 at 10:19 pm

        Neither BYU nor USU are a Power 5. And Notre Dame and Navy aren’t in the same state.

      • Adam
        August 10, 2016 at 11:47 am

        Matt probably meant to say the BYU-Utah game. Utah is a P5, but BYU is not. The summary would read something like this:

        Utah-Brigham Young

        When: Saturday, Sept. 10, 5:30pm MT
        Where: Rice-Eccles Stadium, Salt Lake City, UT
        All-Time Series Leader: Utah, 58-34-4 (62.5%)
        Last-Five: Utah, 5-0 (100%)

        Utah has dominated its little brother, BYU, over the last 13 meetings (10-3, 77%). And they will certainly do so again this fall.

      • Bill
        August 10, 2016 at 3:27 pm

        how would BYU qualify as a “Big” brother?

      • C
        August 11, 2016 at 12:15 pm

        Bill, Utah would be the big brother

      • Mark S
        August 11, 2016 at 3:43 pm

        Someone asked that on Twitter, FBSchedules replied “BYU generally considered P5 so not included.”

      • Matt
        August 11, 2016 at 4:54 pm

        BYU fits the P5 requirement for scheduling for most if not all conferences. The SEC looks at BYU as a P5…last time I checked the SEC is the premier program in College Football.

    4. Bill
      August 10, 2016 at 3:32 pm

      good article ….but i would say Georgia Southern has a much better chance of beating Georgia Tech than many of the games you have ranked as more likely. I don’t think very many people would be surprised is Georgia Southern wins that game.

    5. KF Baxter
      August 11, 2016 at 3:25 pm

      Utah had to be invited to a conference to be considered P5. BYU did it on their own.

      • Wade
        August 12, 2016 at 7:54 am

        BYU is considered by some to be a P5 “for scheduling purposes.” But we’re not actually a P5, since we don’t belong to a P5 conference. That’s why it’s so important for us to get into the Big XII…the fate and viability of our football program rests on it. If we don’t get in and become an actual P5, our future looks no better than that of New Mexico State.

      • Buzz Waldron
        September 8, 2016 at 1:49 pm

        By that thinking, Toledo would also be considered a Power 5 Power Team, since it can beat 1/2 or more of teams from Power 5 Conferences…

    6. zerome4sooners
      August 12, 2016 at 8:23 am

      Little brother = going on every web site possible to talk about how Utah should really be a big brother

    7. Sean
      August 15, 2016 at 3:04 pm

      I think ECU is NC State’s big brother when it comes to football.

      August 22, 2016 at 3:39 pm

      What about Penn State vs Pitt this year?

    9. Craig
      August 23, 2016 at 1:11 am

      I don’t think many Ohio State fans see any MAC schools as “little brother.” The only school that would make sense to have that designation would be U of Cincinnati.

    10. Charles Dean
      November 10, 2016 at 11:25 am

      Where is Alabama-Auburn? Auburn is the ultimate “Little Brother” who lives to beat Big Brother, Alabama. Alabama lives to win national championships; Auburn lives to beat Alabama.

      • Day
        November 21, 2016 at 8:27 am

        When they say little brother, I think they actually mean LITTLE BROTHER! Auburn is not a little brother to Bama, same conference, same league, Auburn has done their fair share of butt whooping on Bama in the past. If that was the case then the article would have Michigan vs Michigan St.

    11. Shelly
      December 31, 2016 at 6:46 pm

      FSU is also UF’s big brother.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    1. Shep
      June 27, 2016 at 4:20 pm

      More series like this please

    2. Day
      June 27, 2016 at 6:25 pm

      Great match-up!

    3. Travis B
      June 27, 2016 at 10:01 pm

      Good series!

    4. gator HATER!
      June 28, 2016 at 2:06 am

      Very nice…It will be great to see Auburn run into Beaver Stadium and Penn State into Jordan-Hare. Not the same seeing college teams at Cowboys Stadium or the Georgia Dome.

    5. bwburke94
      June 28, 2016 at 3:31 pm

      “The Bulls defeated Penn State 10-0 in 1900, before falling to the Nittany Lions in 2017 and 2015.”

      Time traveler alert!

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    1. Craig
      August 28, 2015 at 4:00 pm

      What’s the guarantee to Idaho for this game? Hopefully it covers the transportation logistics. ;-)

      Idaho needs to join the BigSky for all sports.

      • Dave
        August 28, 2015 at 6:57 pm

        Hopefully it will cover all of the medical expenses for poor Idaho. They need to schedule at least 2 body bag games a year now just to survive financially. they are historically one of the most pitiful teams in NCAA football history. I challenge anyone out there to find a school that has done less in their history.

      • Jim
        August 29, 2015 at 8:38 am

        ……..Rutgers. Well over 100 years of futility. Cubs fans look at the and laugh

      • Shep
        August 31, 2015 at 8:13 pm

        Eastern Michigan University.

    2. Rick
      August 28, 2015 at 8:48 pm

      Really, now Penn State!! I’ll really be up for that snoozer! Give these Idaho kids a chance and ask nicely to go back to the Big Sky. What are you wizards of insanity smoking up there??? The God almighty dollar has really turned this program into a money grubbing whore.

      • David
        August 30, 2015 at 9:18 pm

        Running tabs on what happens first… Petrino blows up, or the Big Sky calls. Can’t fault Idaho for holding out hope that the XII gets off the can and invites a couple MW schools such as Colorado State and New Mexico, opening up space for Idaho and NMSU to fill in. They’re just waiting for the XII dominoes to fall. In 2020?

      • ron
        August 31, 2015 at 12:48 am

        Idaho does not have a large enough fan base that the Mountain West would ever be interested in them. They cannot fill a 15,500 airport hangar of a stadium for football and average less than 1,400 for home games in mens basketball. They have no attraction to anyone. Montana would be a better fit but they know better than to try a compete at a level where they would not be comfortable. Just think Montana gets 25,000 plus for home football games and Idaho playing at a higher division gets less than half of that.

    3. RyProj
      September 1, 2015 at 8:24 pm

      As a Penn State Alum and Fan, I am not happy with the scheduling of Idaho. Since it is an odd year, Penn State will look to host 3 non-conference games and it can be challenging to bring folks in; but I feel they could do better than a game against Idaho.

      • Michael Attillio Corbacio
        May 22, 2016 at 9:45 pm

        Every power 5 conference schedules cupcakes. Don’t blame the teams, blame the ncaa. Penn state just like other big time programs will notake give up a home game, too much revenue being generated in state college. Plus small Schools like Idaho will take home more money by going to Penn state then they would hosting a game vs some other small school. Ncaa needs to create a rule where power 5 conferences schedule each other for non conference games, till then my Alma mater will schedule teams that are willing to travel for a road game. We are!!!

      • riley
        November 28, 2016 at 1:16 pm

        i am just a 9 year 0ld so i probaly didn’t understand anything that you jusyt said but i think i agree with you on this . plus peenstate is awesome !!! plus only two loses this season it’s awesome !!!!!, wer’re going to indi !!!!!!!!!

      • riley
        November 28, 2016 at 1:19 pm

        FYI everybody who could be reading this comment right now , the comment that i had just wrote is a reply to RYPROj

    4. John
      September 5, 2015 at 7:28 am

      @RyProj, I hear you. I had a post on the 2018 comments, and yes you get it – that finances dictate 3 home OOC games in those years. I wish they could do better than Idaho, but what if they couldnt? It’s better than Akron, Kent, Toledo again and again. Franklin also told Barbour that wins for the program were most important. He knows if he can win the B10 with no OOC blemishes it will guarantee a playoff spot. He is probably right, a B10 champ with weaker OOC will not be denied. Baylor and TCU were victim not to OOC schedule, but no Conference Championship game, and their commissioner bungling the whole situation. He destroyed Baylor’s chances with his press conferences not backing them.

      As a season ticket holder, I hate having to pay for, and drive 4 hours each way in traffic to see an Idaho, (insert any MAC), SD State, etc. But that is our reality.

      Bonus question: when do we get that return visit from Virginia we were due in 2013?

    5. riley
      November 28, 2016 at 1:12 pm

      go peenstate . okay iam peenstate all the way but seriously we are not rivals with PITT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      so what we lost to them this year but if we got a redo of that game we would’ve beaten their a**’s! plus PITT and Michigan wher our only loses in the whole entire season this year !!!!!!! so think think again when it comes to peenstate VS PITT .

    1. Dave
      October 31, 2014 at 1:59 am

      You know, as a Penn St. fan I am very disappointed with their non-conference scheduling. It’s an utter embarrassment. I’m quite certain if they ever turn their program around and have a top-rated team, they will miss the NCAA playoffs because their schedule is so weak.

      • Joel
        October 31, 2014 at 9:06 am

        Dave I agree wholeheartedly! I’ve been a PSU fan for over 30 years, and I’m getting tired of these schedules with high school teams on them. If the BIG 10 remains weak, you’re right , we won’t make the playoffs in the future. We need SEC, PAC 12 opponents.

      • App State Grad and proud of it
        May 19, 2015 at 6:53 pm

        Remember App State is the team that beat Michigan–bring your A game or App State will bring it for you. I was thinking about coming up there to see this game–would love to see a game at Penn State but these sorry comments are making me think twice.

      • Linuxdood
        May 19, 2016 at 4:53 pm

        Let’s beat Temple this year before we worry about a weak OOC schedule

    2. Joe
      October 31, 2014 at 7:41 am

      What a Joke of a ooc Schedule every year

    3. bob
      November 2, 2014 at 11:34 pm

      This is the main reason our games are not sold out. We are Penn State and we should set an example for the rest of the NCAA and schedule competitive games.

      • Robert Metcalf
        September 16, 2016 at 1:13 pm

        rBad team , less tickets sold. very simple .plus the extra charge on all season ticket holders. Turned a lot of alumni off that supported the team for years , i did not t renew my tickets . I go down to games and buy tickets at the tailgates .

    4. Glenn
      November 3, 2014 at 6:22 pm

      In 1982 we played Nebraska, West Virginia, Alabama, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, all ranked!!
      If you want to be number 1 schedule like you are.

      • John
        December 10, 2015 at 1:59 pm

        @Glenn, you do realize it isn’t 1982 and we are part of a conference that dictates we play 9 conference games going forward? Our AD also requires 7 home games to pay for all our other sports. I’d like to see 1 premium series each year, but that’s all we can do with a home and home commitment.

        That would be a nice schedule, but that’s pre-B10. We cast our lot with the conference.

    5. James
      November 12, 2014 at 3:57 pm

      I really think that regardless of contractual arrangements in place for these games that after this season’s playoff there will be a lot of teams scrambling to reset their schedules. Some schools have already started doing this according to folks on the Sirius XM college football first team. A lot of callers are saying the same thing about their team’s schedules. Something will give and in 2-3 years i would see Penn state starting to look like the tough nosed hard hitting team we’ve all grown to love! Maybe with a bit more speed in the skill positions after seeing what recruiting is shaping up to be. Maybe a tough year or two to be a fan but we should support our team through everything afterall, fans are what drives great games especially at home! Lets Go State!

    6. Dave's a fool
      November 15, 2014 at 2:25 pm

      I just hope our guys can get out of Beaver Stadium without being sodomized.
      Seriously, you guys need to get a grip on how long you have sucked and how the rest of the country views Penn State and your piss poor conference.

      • Garrett Sakona
        June 29, 2015 at 4:06 pm

        Dave shut up. We lost all of our good players and still have a winning record. We not only win, but our students get good grades too. You are forgetting that we have the future #1 draft pick a QB along with the greatest coach of all time. Nobody will ever top 409 wins. We may not play the greatest teams, but we play FBS teams. Every year, each SEC team plays at least one game against a FCS school, and they supposedly are the best conference. We beat national champs Ohio State last year, although the refs took it away. Watch some of the calls. You are forgetting that they also scheduled Pitt, West Virginia and Syracuse for the next few years as well. I am so excited about this. I can’t wait to get these old rivalries started again. I just hope they start scheduling BYU and Notre Dame. You are forgetting that a few years ago, we played Alabama two straight years. It does not get any better than that. For the upcoming years we scheduled LSU along West Virginia with Pitt and Syracuse, so we are playing quality teams. In addition to this, last year Temple and Buffalo were bowl eligible. Buffalo has done so many of the last few years. Meanwhile San Diego State has been to a bowl game 5 straight years. They have becoma a small school power house. Along with the big schools, not only are these good additions, but they play all three in the same year. Appalachian State was also bowl eligible last year and they will play Penn State soon. So before you say how much we stink, get your facts straight.

    7. JackStriker
      November 28, 2014 at 4:33 am

      I like the four year series with PITT. Maybe even make it a two year on two year off event down the road. Each kid growing up in Pennsylvania will have a few games against the rival schools. 2023 looks ideal to me with Va. Tech and WVU on the schedule. A powerhouse like PSU should always have at least two P5 teams on the OOC schedule for the benefit of the fans as well as for the CFP committee. With so many P5 schools nearby like BC, the Virginia schools, PITT, WVU, and Syracuse it seems easy enough especially with PSU’s traveling fan base. Schedule something akin to the Shamrock Series Notre Dame does……

      1.) Home and Home vs. BC @ Beaver Stadium & Fenway Park
      2.) Home and Home vs. SYR @ Beaver Stadium & Yankee Stadium
      3.) Home and Home vs. Va. Tech or Neutral and Neutral @ Lincoln Financial Field and Fed Ex Field
      4.) Home and Home with Cincinnati @ Beaver Stadium and Paul Brown Field

      I would take any two of those road or home games over Kent and Appalachian State in the same season……sorry.

      • Snayburger
        October 9, 2015 at 1:14 pm

        I’ve been saying it for years. PSU should be playing West Virginia, BC, Syracuse, Virginia, Cincinnati, Pitt, Maryland/Rutgers (before they joined B10) NC State every year (do a rotation between them). Then schedule home and homes with Notre Dame, Alabama, Miami, Texas, USC – teams like these.

        I was a PSU season ticket holder for 20 years and finally gave them up. Their non-conference schedule is terrible, what value am I receiving for the tickets I was buying. Honestly B10 is terrible. They should leave that conference and go the Notre Dame route. join ACC in all sports but football and agree to play 5 ACC teams a year that way to get revenue from a conference plus you would sell out Beaver Stadium every game.

      • John
        December 10, 2015 at 1:56 pm

        @Snayburger do the math. You said in another post that you realize they need 7 home games. They cannot play the teams every year you mention (old eastern foes) plus the big premier national opponents. The math does not work. All of those teams with the exception of Temple require a return visit. It will not work with a 9 game Big Ten schedule:

        year 1: 5 home B10 games; home BC, away Bama, 1 TBD home (7 home games)
        year 2: 4 home B10 games; away BC, home Bama, and 1 TBD home (6 home games)

        Pick the team you want, but you can’t have two sets of P5 that require a home and home. You need a P5 that won’t require a visit (e.g. Vanderbilt), or a non P5 (e.g. Connecticut)

        I am a current season ticket holder and I don’t like the games I have to pay for, but that is the way of modern big time football and needing to pay for all the sports with football revenue. All I can say is lets enjoy our fall Saturdays and hope for W’s.

    8. Vic Voltaggio
      December 20, 2014 at 12:23 pm

      To be disgruntled about the schedule is one thing, but consider this. The vaunted SEC will not come North to play anyone. The PAC 12 will not come East and the Big 12 will only schedule the eastern teams at home. Get over it.

      • Dave
        April 23, 2015 at 7:35 pm

        That is a crock. Washington went to Nebraska in 2011, LSU in 2012, Illinois in 2013 and plays at Rutgers in 2017 and @ Michigan in 2021. Penn State should come to Seattle in 2021-2022 when both Washington and Penn State have openings. By then, both of them might even be respectful. It is harder for Washington to get anybody to come to the Northwest.

    9. Steve
      June 8, 2015 at 3:52 pm

      Do you people have any idea what you are talking about. We have played ND and Alabama and other big non con games but when your coming off sanctions this is what needs to be done for a few years to build the program. And bringing the Pitt rivalry is a good thing.

    10. Hellcat
      June 21, 2015 at 4:30 pm

      Penn State vs. Notre Dame please I would love to see that rivalry pick back up again. Especially Now with Franklin steering Penn State and Brian Kelly with Notre Dame. LETS GO PSU

    11. We Are Still
      August 17, 2015 at 10:45 am

      I would love a game between the Huskies and the Lions. With a wife graduating from the UofA (Wildcats), a son graduating from AZ State (Sun Devils), and a son graduating from UW (Huskies) which leaves a Penn State’r paying the bills (the house Lion) I am ready to get some of my money back with a PAC (12 ) old PAC (10) match up every year. Remember the years playing USC, UofA in the kickoff classic? Oh for the good old days! I say play the tough non-conference schedule and let the Lions do their thing.

    12. John
      September 5, 2015 at 7:14 am

      All great ideas, and as a guy growing up during the Eastern Independent years (BC, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, Temple, UMD) every year plus USC, ND, Miami all time, I miss it. But here is the reality you all miss. The Big Ten is now moving to 9 conference games which leaves 3 OOC games. PSU needs 7 home games to pay the bills – that is a fact from the Athletic Departmet which pays for 31 other sports. Some years, there will be 5 away Big Ten games. That requires 3 HOME OOC games. How will you do that win all the home-away P5 match ups you’ve proposed? You can’t. You can have 1 P5 match-up you’ve proposed and the PSU home needs to be the year we have 5 away B10 games. The away can be the year we have 5 home B10 games. But then you nee the other 2 OOC games to be home. Who will that be? Only teams that won’t require a return home game; weak bottom-feeders from P5 (Wake Forest, Cal, Ore St) maybe, or non-P5 teams (MWC, C-USA, AAC, Sun Belt) who will not ask for a return date. Yes, I’m sick of the MAC too, but they serve a purpose. Maybe just one every few years. Never any FCS schools. So, the reality is we can do 1 home-away with a P5, not any more. The financial realities of needing 7 home games and the 9 B10 games ties PSU’s hands.

      • Snayburger
        October 9, 2015 at 1:37 pm

        Botton line is its all about the bottom line. PSU needs & home games.

        They could still rotate every year between BC, Syracuse,Pitt, WVU, Cincinnati, Temple, playing them at home to get 2 of the 3 non-conf games.

        Every other yr PSU will have 5 home B10 games – that year you play the away game (Alabama, ND, USC, Texas) then the next year you have 4 home B10 games so then they come to Beaver Stadium so you have 3 non-conf games at home to get your 7 home games that are needed to support the other 31 sports programs.

        They need to play a top-tier opponent to keep the ticket sales up.

      • John
        December 10, 2015 at 1:42 pm

        @Snayburger, it sounds easy, but that is not going to every happen and you know it. If you could get Bama, UT, ND, you aren’t also working in all those ACC and AAC games you say to work through. Temple may agree to a 2-1 or a 3-1, but we know Cuse, BC, Cincy, Pitt, WVU will not. How do you work two sets of teams requiring a home and away with the 9 game Big Ten schedule? You don’t. Take your pick. I’d rather the national opponents than propping up ACC teams, but Bama, UT, ND also have pretty full OOC schedules going out 6 years.

        On the years you have 5 Big Ten away games you need 3 home OOC games. That could be your premier OOC game (in your case – Bama, UT, etc). The other two need to be schools that don’t require a visit the following year.

        You need to find a bunch of teams that are willing to visit without requiring a return. That’s where you can fill in with lower-tier P5 or non P-5 FBS teams. Sadly, what needing 7 home games does, is limit you to 1 premier OOC game. The other fact is that Franklin has stated he wants easier games. Not FCS, but he wants the wins, and figures that if he can win the Big Ten, he will be in the playoff. He’s probably right.

        You don’t have to tell me, I’m a long-time season ticket holder/NLC member. I don’t like the long drive to watch MAC teams or other similar ones. Some years, it has been next to impossible to sell tickets. This past year was one of the worst home schedules ever with only Michigan a good team to watch. Also, I’m not sure how much Sandy Barbour minds some empty seats. Most of those empty seats were already paid for by us NLC members.

        We all want a better schedule, it just won’t happen.

    13. Sal Guadagnino
      October 12, 2015 at 2:56 am

      The only thing that Franklin is steering is a sinking ship. His offensive line coach is a joke and the defensive coordinator is even worse. Thet claim they are bringing in these 3 and 4 star recruits, well after this coaching staff get done with them they are like walk-ons

    14. BobS
      October 16, 2015 at 9:37 am

      Wow, all the haters… Keeping in mind that we lost to TEMPLE this year so what, exactly, do we have to brag about and demand strong out of conference teams??
      Look at Ohio State’s OOC schedule last year…Kent State? Cincinnati? or this year…Hawaii? Northern Illinois? Western Michigan??
      There are 3 OOC games per year, and 9 in conference…let the team get their legs under them for a couple games each year before they run the conf schedule. I see nothing wrong with that. In the end, if they’re undefeated, they will be OK.
      After so many years of insignificance…you guys are really getting ahead of yourselves…

    15. Chloedog1712
      October 18, 2015 at 6:55 pm

      We need a super conference and get rid of all these other worthless football programs.

    16. PSU1971
      December 1, 2015 at 7:45 pm

      PSU will be much improved next year. Franklin just terminated the offensive coordinator and PSU had the 4th best recruits. We have plenty of talented players on both sides of the ball coming back for the next several years. So we should see improvement. Furthermore, OSU, Mich and MSU are losing key players which will allow for a more competitive conference. 2016 should be a fun year in the Big 10.

    17. todd tonozzi
      December 5, 2015 at 11:43 pm

      penn state is a joke. They idolize a criminal who had zero honor and now is really warm and toastie in his home down below. worse fans in America. Will be dominated by the Buckeyes with Frankie as ped state coach.

    18. Rick little
      February 23, 2016 at 4:34 am

      PSU needs to win games against the mid majors. App State is a good football program. College football has changed in many ways. Kids go to where they can play now and not wait behind someone for 2 years.
      We Are Penn State

    19. Rick little
      February 23, 2016 at 4:40 am

      To App State Fan
      Come to Happy Valley
      No matter the score of the game
      Come enjoy the energy in the stadium
      I think you will have a blast

      • App Grad
        July 5, 2016 at 5:06 pm

        Thanks, we probably will. I grew up watching Jo PA and Penn State. The game will be great, we play well and we play hard. It is exciting football. We were the first FCS to FBS team to go to and win our first bowl game—yes a smaller bowl, but exciting and great football. Thanks for the invite and for recognizing something the rest of this list might learn the hard way. I hope Penn State gets back to the place you deserve—at the top. I admire the kids and fans that stayed with the program even though I think the criminal charges are terrible and I hope that monster stays in jail.

    20. Rick little
      February 23, 2016 at 4:43 am

      Remember when:
      Joe Pa wanted an Eastern Football Conference and no one would buy in.

    21. Jerry Hoover
      May 24, 2016 at 11:54 am

      That is what I have been saying right along. PSU non-conference schedule sucks and always have. Akron, Cincinnati, Kent State, Umass come on! You should be putting in some competition. ND, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, UCLA, No one is going to pay those prices to see Kent State and PSU play or Akron play PSU.. If you want to win a national title you got to run with the big dogs. Playing these schools like Cincinnati is ot going to do it.

    22. CHIP72
      June 15, 2016 at 6:39 pm

      Penn State’s schedule was A LOT more attractive IMO back in their eastern independent days. They played regional rivals AND 2-3 major programs every year, not teams from the Flyover County Conference (Big Ten) and Little Flyover Country Conference (MAC). That’s the major reason why I stopped caring about Penn State football in the mid-1990s.

    Penn State Fan Shop